Posts made by Arkandel

@Ominous said in Social Conflict via Stats:

I addressed this in another thread. I posited that the solution may be using a "fortune in the middle" system instead of "fortune at the end" like most MUs use. Instead of person A poses, person A rolls social skill against person B, person B reacts, repeat for next set of poses, persons A discusses what their goal is at the start of the scene with person B, they roll and find out how successful or unsuccessful person A will be, then they play out the scene knowing which direction it's going to go.

That works fine if you go into a scene already knowing what it's about; however, at least for me, going into a meeting with an agenda accounts for a relatively small segment of my roleplay. Usually it's more like "I'm meeting people at Elysium, one of them mentions something I need to know more about and I've got to convince them to tell me everything", or going to a PrP and I want to get another character to follow my IC plan (which I don't have ahead of time, I don't even know what the PrP will be about beforehand). Stuff like that.

I think it's imperative we somehow find a good design around social stats on MU* but so far I haven't ran across a robust system that does the job. Usually either it's too complicated or too simplistic to cover the range of outcomes. Even games which come with this sort of thing out of the box like CoD don't seem to be seeing a lot of use - correct me folks if I'm wrong but I've never, ever seen Doors used in day-to-day roleplay in the GMC-based MU* I've been playing for what, almost two years now? Is that just my perception?

What I like about social (and mental) stats being part of the game: That otherwise they are greatly underdevalued, for the same investment, compared to their physical counterparts; a punch is a punch and it counts, but anyone can play being manipulative even if their actual attributes suck.

What I dislike about social stats and powers being part of the game: They are disruptive in scenes. Violent scenes are rare but social ones are constant; it's really inconvenient when people start rolling for things every other pose ('I roll for Dominate. Oh, it failed. Okay, I roll again next pose. Oh yeah, let me look up if it works like I think it does or like you think it does. Oh, let's ask staff. Oh, why are you slicing your own wrists?').

A good system would probably be greatly dependent on its interface... and it'd need to be a damn good interface to get around this.

@Insomnia said in RL Anger:

So, can someone explain to me why if she won the popular vote, she didn't win?

One of the main reasons is to safeguard a system against the tyranny of the majority - it would take too much power out of the hands of minorities, allow large urban centres too much sway over the whole, etc.

Essentially it would also mean politicians could target and focus on benefiting the largest States more than smaller ones since that's where most of the voters are - and chances are a web developer in San Francisco has different priorities than a cattle farmer in Wyoming, but you really don't want to screw the latter over just because there's fewer of them around.

@Vorpal The burden of democracy falls on its citizens. Since there is no way to disqualify people who are "wrong for the job" without the same filter preventing perfectly eligible candidates from doing the same if it's abused, it's up to people to make the decision for themselves.

Or to quote someone who said it better than I can... "Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time".

It's true. We get to pick our leaders, and if we fuck it up well...at least it's our mistake to make. It still beats the alternative.

@Monogram said in RL Anger:

I don't know anymore. The angry person in me would hope for a quick impeachment or retelling of Dallas 1963 but...

I know where you're coming from, and I'm certainly no Trump supporter, but that's wrong.

Democracy is meaningless if we only believe in it when someone we approve of is elected to office. The will of the people either means something or it doesn't.

So, for the non-Americans among us, can anyone explain the result (yet)?

Who is voting for a reality TV star/millionaire? Obviously women/black people/Hispanics voted for Trump, but why? Were we outsiders given the wrong impression about how he was perceived over there?

@Ganymede is a coterie-mate for thiiis guy --> http://reno.mechanipus.com/wiki/Richter .

But yeah, if you're sane and can pose let's have us a chat.

As someone who's played Skyrim but not a lot, is the SE worth getting as well? Give me the 101 please.

Updated for Reno 2.0.

An odd case of reverse PoGo is when people stare at players these days. "You are STILL playing that?"

Yes, the game you played six weeks ago is still being played. Just because you stopped playing it doesn't mean it's no longer any good for anyone else.

I love Westworld. It's so good.

I just hope it can cash the cheques it's writing, because the last time I watched a series stockpiling its mysteries at this high a rate it was Lost, and we all know how that ended.

Every time Rick has said 'Carl' in TWD.

... up until season 4, at any rate.

@Auspice It also might not be, y'know, a choice. Not everyone can afford a nice house with a big yard.

Wow.

@tragedyjones I read this as "...that aren't me TSing".

@lordbelh said in Welcome to Fallen World MUX!:

Those players who focus solely on it from the start aren't subtracting anything, they're still adding to the game in a myriad of small ways.

Oh I agree. I don't blame those players (although with the Incro-variety I do since that's what they're in it for to begin with). When the game offers little else to do people will resort to whatever RP they can find, which just so happens to be forming relationships.

As to what is being added to the game though... well, it depends. I feel the opportunity cost can sometimes squander other possibilities which offsets the benefit of at least sticking around and actively roleplaying.

For instance during the first few weeks the MU* was running, even while player excitement was high and staff involvement wasn't bottoming out, I was pasted pages where a player was asked for a scene by someone she had only met once "but let's not do Mage stuff, how about a date?". She didn't agree, so the other character vanished from her life, just like that. This sort of thing can leave you with a certain impression of the game overall, even if it's unintended by ts runners and even if it is undeserved.

I don't wanna sound like I'm against relationship RP though - that'd be hypocritical as I do it myself.

@Vorpal I am sorry man. There are no words. My condolences.

@skew @tragedyjones has women shouting at him all the time, albeit for the wrong reasons.

@Rook That happens all the time. It's when two people have up-voted the same post for example, but I only clicked on that post once. The audacity!

@Bobotron I otherwise really like oWoD Werewolf. The one thing I don't is the same as its 2.0 equivalent; it's very dependent on having plots available. The whole game is dependent on PvE conflict for everything, from character advancement to its basic theme, but someone needs to run the bad guys.

And that's a premium resource on MU*.